Why is Wiki so Terrified of Dr Judy Wood?

Posted: December 3, 2017 in Mid-East

I found this post, “wiki archive-5, request for assistance”, in editing.., in Wiki Archives.  Before it completely disappears into the rabbit-hole, I thought it should be copied and pasted, somewhere.  This seemed as good a spot as any:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Editor_assistance/Requests/Archive_5

Dr. Judy Wood has been, and will continue to be, an increasingly important and critical figure in the 9/11 Truth Movement. It is not clear how many well respected scientists such as myself will be needed to form a “significant minority” opinion that Dr. Wood merits her own biography page at Wikipedia, but please count me in, and please let me know what it is going to take to get a biography up about her at Wikipedia — one that remains up without being removed. I may be able to circulate a signature page if need be at the up and coming “Scholars for 9/11 Truth” meeting in Madison, WI, for which Dr. Judy Wood is the leading scientist and the keynote speaker, though I would hope there is significant enough data avaiable on the Internet alone to make it obvious just how influential Dr. Wood has become for this movement. 75.36.200.38 14:54, 1 August 2007 (UTC) Sincerely, H. Nicole Young, Ph.D.

There are guidelines available that could help sustain an argument for retaining such an article. Consider reviewing WP:BIOWP:BLPWP:GAWP:RS, and WP:V for tips on what might be needed for such an article. —Aarktica 15:08, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Whatever you do, be sure to avoid making your case using WP:ILIKEIT rhetoric. —Aarktica 15:09, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Any subject must be notable with only neutral (more to that just being objective) and verifiable material. Neutrality is more achievable if the material is written be a disinterested party without COI, which may include holding strong feelings about a subject. Adrian M. H. 15:14, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Your proposed effort to “…circulate a signature page…” may be perceived as canvassing, and many Wikipedians frown on that. —Aarktica 15:37, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Anyone wishing to recreate the article should take a look at the deletion arguments that took place in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Judy Wood and determine whether they can be cleared up within the guidelines above. There were some substantial issues raised with regards to her notability outside of the 9/11 Truth sphere. Tony Fox (arf!) 16:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Maybe just create a redirect to 9/11 Truth Movement? She’s mentioned here:

While the so-called ‘Pod’ theory asserts that the jetliners bore some sort of explosive pods, a few members such as Judy Wood and former Labor Dept. economist Morgan Reynolds are proponents of what is called ‘No Boeing’ or ‘No-plane’ theory, which asserts that jetliners were not used at all to bring the towers down, going on to accuse major media networks of complicity in a supposed plot to broadcast a computer animationor CGI plane on live television using special effects technology.

CliffC 16:34, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

**

Now, I do wish someone would explain, to me, what it is Wiki has against factual evidence?  Is it the same problem, “Science”, suddenly has with reason and discernment?  Seems so, and this in particular, has dumbed-down the entire field.

Advertisements
Comments
  1. annebeck58 says:

    I’ve been perusing these internets, and continually come across ugly commentary about Dr Wood. I will say, I am of the camp which does not appreciate the use of food-terms, “wheat chex, cheetos”, and other things I don’t see, “rolled-up carpet”, and wish Dr Wood would stick with proper, scientific, terminology. However, I would say this; Dr Judy Wood is the only accredited person to bring forth factual evidence of what did happen on 9-11-01, and in the aftermath of this event. I find it disheartening that so many people are allowing others to do their thinking for them. Because their gurus call Dr Judy Wood names, and poo-poo her facts (which they call theory?), these hangers-on do the same. Not one person, as far as I’ve been able to find, is yet to, “debunk”, the work of Dr Wood. Instead, they call names, make other disparaging comments, and assign theories to her. Not a bit of the many posts of/about Dr Wood stand on their own.
    I wish the people of this world would just do what Dr Judy Wood has suggested and requested; LOOK at the FACTS. Comprehend the truths, first, and then work out what actually happened, that day, based on these facts. Stop making up garbage, people!

    Like

Tell us what you really think- no moderation necessary!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s